17to85
-
Posts
19,224 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
138
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Posts posted by 17to85
-
-
your acting like he has not been successful before or that even with inconsistent play, that he doesnt win.. both are wrong.. if he's able to string it together enough to score some and our defense keeps it up... we can win.. suggesting otherwise is just being ignorant.
The Buck Pierce of 2010 or even 2011 doesn't exist any more. He didn't do a **** lot of winning last year and this year he's playing exactly the same way. He is not a good qb anymore and it's very sad to see cause he used to be a damned good one. Injuries have ruined him because he can't play his game anymore and trying to play the game like Anthony Calvillo or Ricky Ray was never a strength of Pierce. The problem is that he can't string it together enough to score enough points. He didn't do it in week one and he didn't do it enough tonight... but he got saved by the defense turning in an unbelievable night. Won't happen many times in the CFL period that you hold a team to 4 points until well into the 4th quarter.
-
I like a lot of what Crotwon has out there, there are options to deal with the blitz, there are lots of receivers open.... our qb is just not the right qb for this offense. No one is scared of him beating them with his arm so they'll just focus on the run and blitz blitz blitz and trust that he won't be able to string together enough plays to score enough points. Backfired on Montreal tonight because the bombers D was relentless and absolutely blew up the Als o-line all night long but you can't expect to get that many sacks every night and rattle a qb that much.
-
how do you figure? he won, yes? he made plays when needed, yes? he didnt give the game away... pretty sure his stats line was pretty... yup, you guessed it.. average.
wrong on so many levels. Bryant turner won the game by making a play when needed. Desia Dunn won the game by making a play when needed. Pierce had turnovers directly related to him, failed to get a sizable lead despite the defense doing everything it could. The defense made more plays than the offense ****** up tonight simple as that. That offense was overall terrible tonight, an outstanding performance by the defense won the game period end of discussion.
-
-
have some patience.. he can and will do it.. he hit jade last game for a beauty quick hitter, kolhert for some hitches and quicks tonight.. he will improve.. besides, goltz.. is he ready? i dont think so..
what part of inconsistent don't you understand? That means that sometimes he'll make the throw, other times he won't. This isn't judgements based solely on these first two games either, these are things Pierce has been showing for some time now. Burying your head in the sand hoping that he just magically gets it all of a sudden won;t help anything.
-
in the first half the offense was good turnover aside, in the 2nd half they weren't. simple as that.
-
oh ease up. you have a strong dislike for buck and thats all well and good but he is not "bare minimum" hes satisfactory for now if he keeps playing at this level... wouldnt be the first time the bombers go with an average qb and be successful.. salsbury and Burgess come to mind..
you'd have to spin pretty hard to make Pierces performance seem average at this point.
-
he also took a beating and kept going.. if we figure out how to gear our offense to punish the blitz then it will loom even better..
part of the reason the offense isn't punishing the blitz is pierces limitations. He's too inconsistent a passer to stand there and beat a blitz with his arm.
-
I ******* love that defense.
-
tackles are more valuable the closer they are to the LOS. You gotta take them with a good dose of observation as well. If a guy is getting lots of tackles 20 yards downfield that's a problem, if he's getting lots within 5 yards that's good.
-
seeing how the bombers came out after halftime I want to put some faith in our coaches making good adjustments. Now just up to the players to execute.
-
When Noel Devine gets yardage from anything other than a sweep or an outside pitch, then I will be concerned. He's hardly slippery, he's just speedy.
Not to mention that as the game wore on those sweeps became much less effective as the bombers knew it was coming and made sure guys were in position to stop it. Thinking that Montreals offense being new caught them napping a bit early on but as the game went along the bombers D started sniffing those out.
-
He'd be better if he'd give up on the PI drama.
yes... but that one on 3rd down in week one he definitely had a case because it was text book PI that wasn't called. Denmark is another guy who protests too much about PI calls. Would much rather they just keep fighting and hopefully the refs don't have their heads in their asses and will make the calls.
-
Everyone is saying that but I'm not sure I agree. The Als are gearing up against the run and daring the Bombers to pass it. So to me, trying to run it is a fool's errand. They need to execute in the passing game because that's where the opportunities will be. Until they can execute the passing game, it will be the same old story every week.
It's true, and it's going to be the exact same gameplan all year for teams facing the bombers. stop the run and laugh when Pierce thinks he can beat you with his arm. The qb position is such a liability for the bombers right now that it makes the offense much easier to defend. Pierce NEEDS to have success passing the ball if this team has a hope in hell of ever getting a consistent running game going. He had the receivers open to make plays passing last week, now he needs to actually hit his targets more consistently.
-
Football isn't as black and white as folks make it out to be. I don't think Edwards gives us enough considering his salary. I don't think he has many good games left in him. Mack brings in lots of good receivers. So sure, I'd go younger and cheaper in this case.
I'd keep Edwards around for the veteran presence, I'd just stop asking him to be one of the teams top receivers, which based on last game is happening anyway, although Pierce does seem to be a guy who loves throwing to Edwards,probably a lot of trust there
-
he also hit mathews on that reverse fade for the td, jade on a quick out for 8 yards and pontibrand for a big first down too so stop trying to make it like hes incapable.. its a work in progress, no doubt but not thos dismal failure your implying..
How many points did they get in the fourth quarter? how many first downs did they get? How is that anything but a dismal failure? I know you like to believe everything is fine but PIerce was absolute **** in game 1 outside of a few drives and a big part of it is that he's not a good enough passer to beat teams with his arm. Back in his best days if the blitz came he could simply run the ball himself and make them pay, but now when he hook slides when guys get within 3 yards of him he's no where near as effective a player.
-
As someone else pointed out... other teams do face the blitz and eventually they can capitalize off of it.
All I know is that Pierce had zero time in the pocket.... most other teams had much more time...
Pierce wasn't making plays to nullify the blitz. Case in point: when they were backed up on the goal line... bombers had a good play call pierce threw the ball at the fullbacks feet so he didn't have a chance to make the play. Next play he threw the ball at edwards feet and didn't give him a chance on it either. Wasn't the only time the qb failed to make the defense pay for blitzing. Right now trying to stop pierce from running is making him very easy to defend via blitzing because he's not getting the ball away quick enough or accurate enough to cause teams to slow down. Kevin Glenn was actually really good at slowing teams down by throwing quickly.
-
How can we say our o line is under rated when they were dominated whenever Montreal blitzed them. I know things would of been better had Buck made some quick reads and releases... but dear lord he had zero steamboats meanwhile in the 4th Calvillo had a tonne of time.
well that is precisely the point of blitzing... bring more than can be blocked and force the qb to get the ball out quickly and accurately. There weren't many times when a blitz came and someone was just flat out missed. happened a couple times but it wasn't a common occurence, most of the pressure was montreal simplying bringing more than the bombers had blockers. That's the other difference, the bombers were bringing pressure with primarily 4 man rushes, much less blitzing.
-
Really think people underestimate our OL. It's actually pretty good and, for the most part, they gave Buck quite a bit of time in the first game....never mind that this same crew was one of the best (...if not THE best...) down the stretch (final 7 games...) last year...
Especially when you consider that it required quite a bit of blitzing for Montreal to get pressure on Pierce, and blitz pickups it seems to me are one of the things that takes time for offenses to really nail down. Would have liked to see them get simpson some more running room but at the same time the bombers didn't really stick with the run game enough either.
-
Those options won't matter when Calvillo is on a stretcher. They were brutal last week. Their interior guys were getting shelled by Ryan Lucas. If I was coaching the Als, Woodruff wouldn't eat another poutine. Roundest gut in the league.
I recall one play where basically every bombers d-lineman wound up piled on top of Calvillo... lot of the shine really came off the montreal o-line after that game.
-
Way to early to tell... but based on how many seconds he had in the pocket... it looked to me that Ray had a lot of protection.
how ever last season hamilton had all sorts of problems getting pressure on qbs so I'd be waiting a bit to see if hamilton is poor on the d-line and how the argos o-line fairs against a possible stiffer test before making any real judgements there.
-
i know what you're saying. he did say that it was Winnipeg's backups that got beat 52-nada though.
and i don't think he's saying "win now or you have no hope in hell of winning this season", i got more of a "win now or you'll risk stepping into a hole that you may not be able to get out of later" from it.
also: Toronto only gave up 3 points in the second half... so it's more accurate to say that they were garbage for a half.
spin harder. you know damned well that's a disingenuous argument.
but seriously maybe you just don't read weicek enough if you really think that was his point.... he is very negative and a lot of it does stem from him not liking the CFL (he's said this before) so he doesn't care to look in depth into anything and he's a sour person so he always takes the worst case scenario with every bomber loss.
-
for me, the underlying thrust of the article was that the Bombers face a tough road ahead. i don't see a problem with someone suggesting that if the Bombers lose in Montreal that they will be putting themselves in a very tough spot... since they will be.
all points to the contrary (ie: the season is still young, the CFL is erratic and arbitrary) are also valid... but the writer was saying that if the Bombers (for some reason) weren't feeling pressure this weekend... they ought to be.
hell, if i was a Bomber i'd be telling everyone that it was a must-win... i'd tell them that every frickin week.
but there's a big difference between saying that, and saying what the article actually said. He brought up the 52-0 preseason loss like it mattered... not a lot of roster players were in that game. It also seems to indicate that both Hamilton and Toronto looked good in week one which may be true of their offenses but both defenses looked like garbage.... Then he trots out the teams go to die in BC place and all sorts of other things. It's not just as simple as saying "the CFL is tough, gotta get some wins early" it's saying "this team sucks and if they don't win now they have no hope in hell of winning this season" It's not surprise you don't mind it, you are already of the opinion that the bombers suck ass so it's just confirmation bias to you.
-
Why should he be glowingly positive? We haven't been a good football team offensively in a very long time. And Game One was no better.
If you want all sunshine and rainbows, read the Leader Post in SK. Their GM can fondle little girls and the reporters don't even have the balls to ask the team to comment on it.
It's not about wanting sunshine and rainbows, it's about wanting a good balanced piece. No overly positive or negative slant, just tell it like it is. And insisting that these guys suck and if they lose this week there's no hope of winning much at all is not that. There's only one team, maybe 2 that didn't show some pretty massive holes over the first week, majority of the teams look very beatable.
Defense!
in Blue Bomber Discussion
Posted
I'm actually worried about what the argos defense will do to pierce. I don't think their secondary is all that great, but they will blitz Pierce from all over and I don't see him being able to recognize it and make the throws needed to slow them down at all.